Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Guys, help me out here...

rated by 0 users
This post has 22 Replies | 5 Followers

Not Ranked
Male
Posts 26
Points 770
Omoplata Posted: Wed, Jul 15 2009 7:09 PM

I will try and keep a long story short but in a nutshell, I post on a sci-fi/fantasy forum and one of the topics is Libertarian Sci-Fi.  Everything was going along as normal, members were recommending good libertarian sci-fi books and authors, etc...All of a sudden, one of the more pompus asses of the site start bashing libertarians saying they think they are so smart blah blah blah...this was one of his posts...I am a novice libertarian and really have no clue what this nitwit is saying...Help me out here guys if you don't mind...

Here is is post:

This Libertarianism pretends to operate in a historical vacuum. Ultimately a lot of property was obtained by war.

In 1995 the number of automobiles in the US passed 200,000,000. At $1,500 in depreciation per car per year that is $300,000,000,000 lost in depreciation every year. If you check the book
The Millionaire Next Door it says that 36% of millionaires buy used cars. Now why would they do that?

Depreciation is bad for NET WORTH so if one is managing one's wealth properly he should be thinking about depreciation before a purchase is made.

When do you ever hear economists talk about Demand Side Depreciation. If you research Net Domestic Product, which economists don't mention much, you will see they only track Supply Side Depreciation. This system depends on consumers being STUPID.

Now how doe this relate to technology and Science Fiction? Good Sci-Fi writers present us with conceivable though improbable futures. Although I consider the possibility of a galactic empire ridiculous Asimov's Foundation Trilogy changed my view of history. Part of his story was how technology can be deliberately manipulated. So people that know the technology can scam those that do not. The SR-71 Blackbird was doing 2000 mph in 1964. What does that say about how much was known about aerodynamics 45 years ago? Why should we give a damn about changes in cars that roll along the ground at less than 130 mph?

So how many trillions of dollars have Americans lost unnecessarily on automobiles?

I don't hear the so called LIBERTARIANS saying anything about that. They just seem to think they are smart because they claim to be Libertarians. How much liberty can they have if they can't figure out when they are being ripped off?


What is a good rebuttle for this nonsense?

  • | Post Points: 110
Top 200 Contributor
Male
Posts 478
Points 9,180

The guys clearly an idiot. 

Austrians do it a priori

Irish Liberty Forum 

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 16
Points 215

Omoplata:


So how many trillions of dollars have Americans lost unnecessarily on automobiles?

Well...there's that whole GM thing.

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,651
Points 51,325
Moderator

So the guy is saying that nobody should buy new cars because of depreciation and that used cars don't depreciate? Huh? Maybe we should just shut down the auto industry and outlaw car repair to prevent "stupid" consumers from ever worrying about vehicle deprecation?

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 178
Points 2,440
nameless replied on Wed, Jul 15 2009 7:48 PM

I laughed out loud at the guy's post.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 574
Points 9,305
Natalie replied on Wed, Jul 15 2009 7:49 PM

What does this have to do with libertarianism?

If I hear not allowed much oftener; said Sam, I'm going to get angry.

J.R.R.Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 26
Points 770
Omoplata replied on Wed, Jul 15 2009 7:54 PM

That was what I asked him initially when he brought up accounting and he spewed out the above post.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 36
Points 520

krazy kaju:

So the guy is saying that nobody should buy new cars because of depreciation and that used cars don't depreciate? Huh? Maybe we should just shut down the auto industry and outlaw car repair to prevent "stupid" consumers from ever worrying about vehicle deprecation?

Did you read a word he said?  He was clearly demonstrating the superiority of the SR-71 Blackbird as a mode of personal transportation.  If only consumers weren't too STUPID to realize that technology was being withheld from them, they'd demand that the government produce them for everyone.  Think of the jobs that will be created!

I want mine purple, with orange racing stripes.  Sweet!

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,162
Points 36,965
Moderator
I. Ryan replied on Wed, Jul 15 2009 8:00 PM

I was unable to follow that post. It was so nonsensical that I do not even remember what I read.

If I wrote it more than a few weeks ago, I probably hate it by now.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 244
Points 3,785
Pablo replied on Wed, Jul 15 2009 8:43 PM

Prelude To Ruin:

krazy kaju:

So the guy is saying that nobody should buy new cars because of depreciation and that used cars don't depreciate? Huh? Maybe we should just shut down the auto industry and outlaw car repair to prevent "stupid" consumers from ever worrying about vehicle deprecation?

Did you read a word he said?  He was clearly demonstrating the superiority of the SR-71 Blackbird as a mode of personal transportation.  If only consumers weren't too STUPID to realize that technology was being withheld from them, they'd demand that the government produce them for everyone.  Think of the jobs that will be created!

I want mine purple, with orange racing stripes.  Sweet!

You made me laugh really loud.

Hahaha.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 244
Points 3,785
Pablo replied on Wed, Jul 15 2009 8:45 PM

Omoplata:
They just seem to think they are smart because they claim to be Libertarians.

Cool

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Wed, Jul 15 2009 8:52 PM

Omoplata:

What is a good rebuttle for this nonsense?

The proper response to this is:

 

kool?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 183
Points 3,245
Rooster replied on Wed, Jul 15 2009 10:37 PM

Good luck responding to every idiot on the Internet Geeked

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 754
Points 11,800

Omoplata:
What is a good rebuttle for this nonsense?

 

Retardation is not kryptonite....

Your answer should be "You sir, Have no point.  Intelligence is not necessary for liberty, you have liberty when no one has the right to steal from you."

He does not, he is spewing "I read a book and it told me this!"

I read a book and it told me that a man could float around like a bubble, but he would not do it because the party does not want it, I did not believe that either...

 

Do millionaires by used cars?  I do not know, nor do I care, I buy used cars, because I can fix them and do not like loans...

 

It sounds like the ocean, smells like fresh mountain air, and tastes like the union of peanut butter and chocolate. ~Liberty Student

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 87
Points 2,025

Harry Felker:
Your answer should be "You sir, Have no point.  Intelligence is not necessary for liberty, you have liberty when no one has the right to steal from you."

how can you laugh in the face of pure genius?! dont you see your wealth is evaporating everyday; the working man is losing billions every year! new tampons lose 95% of their value after purchase. with billions of tampons being bought every year, we are being bled 95% of our wealth! i read a book once and it said 65% of millionaires buy used tampons. still laughing now sheeple?!?!?!

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 754
Points 11,800

Scott Jefferies:
i read a book once and it said 65% of millionaires buy used tampons. still laughing now sheeple?!?!?!

Well, I have trancended the need for tampons, I have a cotton field in my back yard and just have all women in my house stuff raw cotton in themselves...

 

Man that was gross....

It sounds like the ocean, smells like fresh mountain air, and tastes like the union of peanut butter and chocolate. ~Liberty Student

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 26
Points 770
Omoplata replied on Wed, Jul 22 2009 3:49 PM

Not sure if any of you care, but I responded to this guy telling him he made no sense and I am still waiting for a logical explanation...this is what is he said:

You can hold your breath.

I don't believe for one second that all people that call themselves Libertarians use the same definition. I'm not going to try to explain anything in terms of YOUR definition when I don't even care what it is.

But Libertarians usually talk like this Libertarianism can operate in a vacuum from history but how did the people that have the land get it? So much for Libertarian philosophy. Technology has pretty much changed everything though. If an inventor creates somthing that is a threat to some economic interest is he FREE to sell it to them and are they FREE to withhold its implementation? What are the consequences if you say yes to that without any reservations? If you say no doesn't that mean you are not Libertarian? LOL

Check out
Rite of Passage by Alexi Panshin. Were the people onthe ships FREE to withhold knowledge that they did not create? Libertarianism is simple minded with delusions of grandeur. Reality is more complicated.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 754
Points 11,800

Omoplata:
But Libertarians usually talk like this Libertarianism can operate in a vacuum from history but how did the people that have the land get it?

That is because the little tyrant does not understand that you WORK for things....

 

You are better off say you are right FREEDOM IS SLAVERY!!!! and never speak to him again...

It sounds like the ocean, smells like fresh mountain air, and tastes like the union of peanut butter and chocolate. ~Liberty Student

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,221
Points 34,050
Moderator

Omoplata:

Not sure if any of you care, but I responded to this guy telling him he made no sense and I am still waiting for a logical explanation...this is what is he said:

You can hold your breath.

I don't believe for one second that all people that call themselves Libertarians use the same definition. I'm not going to try to explain anything in terms of YOUR definition when I don't even care what it is.

But Libertarians usually talk like this Libertarianism can operate in a vacuum from history but how did the people that have the land get it? So much for Libertarian philosophy. Technology has pretty much changed everything though. If an inventor creates somthing that is a threat to some economic interest is he FREE to sell it to them and are they FREE to withhold its implementation? What are the consequences if you say yes to that without any reservations? If you say no doesn't that mean you are not Libertarian? LOL

Check out
Rite of Passage by Alexi Panshin. Were the people onthe ships FREE to withhold knowledge that they did not create? Libertarianism is simple minded with delusions of grandeur. Reality is more complicated.

In order of his sentences:

1.) Start holding your breath, because your lack of logic is sucking up all the air in the room.

2.) By not bothering to remotely understand, comprehend, & rationally argue against my position, which might involve utilizing some of my own terminology, you are a either a coward or a blatant ideologue who is only arguing with me for social points & high-fives. 

I've argued with others who do not agree with me, & may never agree with me, that are far more rational & less pompous then you are. 

These are the people that are worthwhile to argue with, while people like you are only worth making a fool out of with a rational response to your idiotic grandstanding. 

3.) Libertarianism does not deny history, Statism is part of history. 

Your implied strawman fails terribly, when many scholars of libertarianism frequently write about & address historical concerns, from The Great Depression to the early days of the United State's inception, to possible even the roman empire, if some author's fancy that. 

Technology has indeed changed, but that doesn't rationalize pompous idiots like you running around & pretending to hold The Answer to anyone who doesn't catch your nonsense at first glance.

Do you think technology will ever be able to address the problem of scarcity? 

Do you even care to ponder such worthwhile questions, or do you just like to play Peter the Pundit all day on the internet? 

You reduce yourself to parody by using half-baked arguments & 'LOL!'.  Your attitude reflects very little of a serious attempt at discourse. 

Perhaps if you stopped being an ass, we could actually get somewhere with a civil conversation.

4.) Your objections to libertarianism are simple-minded, & obviously not for the purposes of seriously challenging libertarian doctrine, let alone posing any serious alternatives to libertarianism itself. 

Other opponents of libertarianism should be ashamed for your pedantic idocy, for it only serves to reinforce ignorance in both libertarians & non-libertarians alike. 

If any non-libertarians want to step up & provide an intelligent response, that would be excellent, because frankly, you are incapable of providing anything more than political hot air. 

Good day, sir.

 

I recommend you provide a link to the forum here, btw.  Someone might register over there & provide some cover fire against this obvious troll.

"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 754
Points 11,800

Nitroadict:
I recommend you provide a link to the forum here, btw.  Someone might register over there & provide some cover fire against this obvious troll.

What he (Nitro) said is better Omoplata....

It sounds like the ocean, smells like fresh mountain air, and tastes like the union of peanut butter and chocolate. ~Liberty Student

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 2,966
Points 53,250
DD5 replied on Wed, Jul 22 2009 5:41 PM

Scott Jefferies:

new tampons lose 95% of their value after purchase. with billions of tampons being bought every year, we are being bled 95% of our wealth!

Not necessarily!  In a free market, I would expect that the value of tampons after use can depend on who their original owner was. 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,221
Points 34,050
Moderator

DD5:

Scott Jefferies:

new tampons lose 95% of their value after purchase. with billions of tampons being bought every year, we are being bled 95% of our wealth!

Not necessarily!  In a free market, I would expect that the value of tampons after use can depend on who their original owner was. 

It also depends on where such a market, which might be viewed as perverse by some communities (so there wouldn't be a market for such in some areas vs others), can be profitable enough to warrant such a business venture. 

Japan confirms that such a market does indeed exist for such oddities, as evident by the avaiability of panties in vending machines, which I'd imagine is low cost enough maintenance wise to allow for profit (versus some extraneous outlet that peddles such products for the sake of maintaining enough cash to operate). 

Besides, tampons can be easily recycled regardless.  A free-market would an incredible boon for anyone trying to make a buisness out of recycling things.  The environmentalists wouldn't know what hit 'em :D.

"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict

  • | Post Points: 5
replied on Wed, Jul 22 2009 6:10 PM

ROFL. nice.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (23 items) | RSS